[Seaside-dev] Seaside vs I18N/L10N vs VW

[Lukas Renggli]

> be quite frustrating. Moreover based on what I read in other
> discussions here, the justification for this particular process seems
> rather weak. Forking even lightweight processes for no good
> reason is just plain wasteful, especially on server side. And that's
> again ignoring all the other issues I mentioned besides runtime costs.

Of course Seaside doesn't fork this process just for the fun of it.

What you have there is, in my opinion, a very well thought and
efficient implementation of bounded continuations. Moreover, as a nice
side effect, we get the possibility to terminate run-off processes.

Of course we could achieve the same thing by marking/remembering that
particular stack-frame somehow and bound all continuations to this
particular frame, but it would certainly not ease the implementation
and portability.

Lukas

-- 
Lukas Renggli
http://www.lukas-renggli.ch